www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sam Ruby" <ru...@apache.org>
Subject Re: SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL code in myfaces
Date Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:43:40 GMT
On 8/2/07, Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 August 2007 15:02, Santiago Gala wrote:
> > I'm not really sure what we are trying to achieve here, but a file
> > committed by a Sun employee, that has signed a CLA, while working under
> > Sun direction, etc. *is licensed under AL 2.0*
> Indeed, and it is a matter of either 'mistake' (which we all
> hope), 'ignorance' (which wouldn't be good) or 'malicious' (which some might
> fear)...

Let it go.  Humans are falable in many ways.  It is the job of the PMC
to exercise oversight in these matters.  If the PMC wasn't doing it's
job properly in the past, it is certainly doing so now, as evidenced
by these discussions.

On 8/3/07, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
> I didn't follow the full thread, but if CDDL licensed files exists for
> this dtd I would include them *as* *is* (cddl header): I share the
> interpretation that a dtd file that is not to be used as source to
> generate a binary can be considered a binary wrt the CDDL and ALv2 licenses.

Bah.  I had taken the action item, and had hopes that I could task
this to Doug, just to find out that he is going on vacation just as
this heats up.  The nerve of some people.

I believe that the definition of the term 'source' is too clear and
widely understood for us to ever consider XSD files anything other
than source.  That being said, I do believe that ASF policies should
handle distribution of sources which are in intended to be directly
processed in their original source form the same way that it handle

Until we resolve this, I do believe that MyFaces and any other
projects with similar issues should proceed forthwith with replacing
any and all SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL with what Cliff's "3party"
document calls Class A or Class B licensed material, with the
understanding that we may need to revisit this once the policy is

- Sam Ruby

DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message